Negating negrep

[doom_sheep]

We don't get rid of them, we punish them. It's done like that with everything. If you, me or anyone else was eating plastic toys, we got a warning and then punished. That way we learn and it's how it still works.

no ones eating your precious plastic toys.

 

[Hakeem]

We don't get rid of them, we punish them.

So, essentially, there would be people who moderate rep?

I having a hard time seeing it as worth the effort.

"Rep Moderator."

 

[Steel_Stallion]

I don't get you people. If you want to disregard rep, just disregard it. Stay true to your "noble" intentions and don't judge people by the shiny gems they have.

Just ignore it, why do you even care? Let them have their fun with spinning green shits

 

[Viikuna]

... what? Why the fuck would we do that?

I dont know. Ask it from those guys who like to punish people.



This forum needs some punishment smiley. Punishment moderator could post it everytime he punishes someone. ( I would prefer something like this but litle more punishing: )

 

[Avator]

doom_sheep, Viikuuna: Stop spamming this thread. If you got nothing better to post then toy food and smiley's, don't post at all.


@Hakeem: It doesn't matter if there's a special moderator for that or not, but those things should not be done freely. The least that should happen is if anybody notices abuse of reputation, they should be punished.

 

[doom_sheep]

were not spamming. you brought up toy-eating. its actually a very good analogy since its as dumb idea as "vandalizing" hive would be. like i said, u just want to hate someone. im sorry for you.

 

[Viikuna]

Im not spamming. I had a really good excuse for posting: I answered WILLTHEALMIGHTYs question.


And do not disrespect smileys, pls. It makes them cry, look:

 

[Avator]

Yes, you were both spamming. So get back to the subject or stop posting here and spam your own Pastebin or something.

 

[doom_sheep]

Yes, you were both spamming. So get back to the subject or stop posting here and spam your own Pastebin or something.

you have been spamming the whole thread here. we were not spamming. stop talking bullshit.

 

[Elenai]

doom_sheep, Viikuna, hey!

Cut the spam, or I'll cut your legs off.

Back on-topic now.

 

[Viikuna]

I dont spam, Im simply replying the other peoples posts. ( Like in this and my previous post. )

If you blame me for spamming you should at least point out which one of my post where spam so I can learn that I was wrong and that it indeed was spamming and that I will not spam in the future.

Thanks in advance.

 

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

We remove rep.

Pros:
- No more bitching about rep abuse.
- No more rep whoring.
- Less egos sprouting everywhere.
- Nobody has to "fix" the system.
- Hey, maybe nubs will stop being so childish. You never know.

Cons:
- One or two dozen people whine about how they lost those oh-so-precious rotating gems.

 

[WraithSeeker]

Cons:
- Now it might be hard to judge a person since there is little material to judge a person without rep.

 

[Avator]

You don't solve a problem by just avoiding it WILL. There would be half the issues if people like you would do a little effort to make it work.
Now about your "pros and cons":
-You're bitching right now about removing it. I hope you're aware of that.
-Do you actually think there will be less ego's around when there's no reputation?
-Right... People being childish because of rep? Welcome to the internet WILL, where everybody acts childish. Here's your welcomings bottle and you can take a nap at 12 PM.
-Weren't people like you 'whining' about getting your oh-so-precious rotating black gem?

Don't think I'm insulting you here, I'm just using the same words as you are to make my statement clear.

 

[Paladon]

Reputation encourages people to create something.
It's a typical resource section appearance.

 

[Zombie]

I believe those addicting spinning gems make most people stay here on a long term. It's a good reward, encouragement and punishment. Besides, we would hardly have anything to make a difference between people, for example, how will a new user know who to turn for help or who to respect?

Removing it would only create more drama.

 

[Aeroblyctos]

Make a poll?

 

[WraithSeeker]

For those who want to remove rep they might do multiple account which screw polls.

 

[Aeroblyctos]

For those who want to remove rep they might do multiple account which screw polls.

Same for opposite. :<

 

[Viikuna]

Besides, we would hardly have anything to make a difference between people, for example, how will a new user know who to turn for help or who to respect?

Not true at all.

Well, At least I respect people who have cool stuff in their recourse profile and people who help other people with their problems, not guys who have shiny gems.

And you can get rep from everything ( shit, some guys actually gave me rep for posting to this thread ) , so it doesnt really tell who is experienced and who is not. ( You can also read that Does Hakeem know vJass ? -example I posted earlier on this thread. )

Its funny though, why people keep saying that over and over again?

 

[Septimus]

I agree for the reputation system to be replace, not remove but replace.

Reputation system work as a warning system where a user receive negative reputation to warn them about their offense. With the capability to void the negative reputation, it make the entire warning almost pointless.

Why not replace something that show the amount of warning a user receive rather than reputation?

 

[Mr. Bob]

I see no problem in giving a person with a red gem, rep. Unless, you are giving it exclusively because he/she has a red gem. But, giving rep to a red gem for other reasons, like making a good icon or something, I see no problem.

Moderators can always block rep from regular users while they have neg-rep. Therefore, only serious people, such as mods (or at least some of them), can give rep to them as instructed. For instance: A person did something bad, then he has neg rep. Then, the mods block all other rep sources except their own. After which, the person with neg rep is on surveillance. Whenever he does something good, he gets his/her rep back. (Whenever his/her behavior changes.) But, if he gets worse, ban him.

And, I don't to hear "But, we mods don't have the time". Well, yes you do, frankly. All it takes is 1 minute every day to check on the person.

If that isn't an option for you, simply remove the whole rep system and start over with it.

As for the people giving rep to red gem people simply because of the red gem, a ban isn't really needed. Simply warn him/her, then remove the rep. If he/her does it again, neg rep them. If they do it again, then you can ban them. End of story.

Sorry if I said what other people already did. (I only read the first post.)

 

[Septimus]

Why not reset everybody reputation back to 0? And give the permission to give positive reputation to respected member only?

 

[Avator]

@Mr.Bob: About the giving reputation to negrep people part: That was exactly my point. People who give reputation to someone with negrep just because they want to negate it should be punished.
As for your idea on who may or may not give reputation to people with negrep: I think that's a brilliant idea. If anybody would know if a person who misbehaved deserves a second chance it would be a moderator or anyone else with a respected status.

@Septimus: I don't see the use of that. If you mean everyone who has been given a Respected User Award, then it's complete nonsense. That way there won't be much reputation given at all, which gives as much of a result as disabling it.
Also I really don't understand why the reputation of everybody has to be reset. I don't think it would help anyone, only annoy everybody. Let's say someone worked really hard and really long on a resource and it came out wonderfully. He got reputation for it for his incredible work and you just want to throw away everything he got for the work he did? Sounds like a bad plan.

 

[Septimus]

I rather have the reputation list at user profile show only negative reputation rather than the latest reputation.

 

[Ham Ham]

I can come to my conclusion: People negating negrep should be punished. First time punished with negrep and after that, you can use more severe punishments like temporary ban.

Thats stupid (to say the least)! I rep people who give usefull comments or report bugs on my maps, weatever if they have positive or negative rep.

 

[Mr. Bob]

Thats stupid (to say the least)! I rep people who give usefull comments or report bugs on my maps, weatever if they have positive or negative rep.

No, he means people who give rep to people with neg rep purely because they have neg rep.

 

[Ham Ham]

No, he means people who give rep to people with neg rep purely because they have neg rep.

Right, then how to determinate if the person really wanted to reward an usefull user, or just reped because the guy had neg rep?

 

[Mr. Bob]

Right, then how to determinate if the person really wanted to reward an usefull user, or just reped because the guy had neg rep?

Wether or not what they repped is rep worthy obviously...

Plus, when people say "You need some rep" that should be a hint. Common
sense comes into play here.

 

[Ham Ham]

Wether or not what they repped is rep worthy obviously...

Plus, when people say "You need some rep" that should be a hint. Common
sense comes into play here.

Well, so that would require "Reputation Moderators", or something like that. The current Hive mods are already too busy with their obligations, like a submited resource takes 2 weeks to 1 month to be aproved/reproved. The mods cant spend a time they dont have doing thse things. Also, Rep is not so that important at the point to mobilize a new moderation category.

 

[Mr. Bob]

Well, so that would require "Reputation Moderators", or something like that. The current Hive mods are already too busy with their obligations, like a submited resource takes 2 weeks to 1 month to be aproved/reproved. The mods cant spend a time they dont have doing thse things. Also, Rep is not so that important at the point to mobilize a new moderation category.

Somehow, I knew you would say this.

As I said earlier, "And, I don't to hear "But, we mods don't have the time". Well, yes you do, frankly. All it takes is 1 minute every day to check on the person."

The ratio of mods to neg repped people is like 20 to 15. It's not that hard. It takes around 15 seconds to check if they have any new rep. And if they do, just read the comment.

Please go back and read my large post.

 

[Arvedui]

The ratio of mods to neg repped people is like 20 to 15. It's not that hard. It takes around 15 seconds to check if they have any new rep. And if they do, just read the comment.

Please go back and read my large post.

I dunno if you tl;dr the thread but:

There is no real deterrent for giving the person rep because you can give rep for whatever you want. If you want to get rid of someone's -rep but it's against the rules, you would just be able to change the comment from "no more -rep" to "that's cool" or something else that's equally generic.

There's no reason to do this because you can just disguise it as something else.

 

[Avator]

Read what he says, will you? You've been given a well-functioning brain when you were born, so keep that mass active. Then you can see the difference between real rep and disguised rep.
@Ham Ham: Read the previous posts. That's been discussed already. If you're too lazy to read them, you shouldn't post here at all.

 

[Arvedui]

Read what he says, will you? You've been given a well-functioning brain when you were born, so keep that mass active. Then you can see the difference between real rep and disguised rep.

Lol nice trolling

If you had actually read what I said, you would realize that it's entirely possible to fool someone with rep. But no, that would make your point and this thread moot, which it is.

If I wanted to disguise the rep for someone who was just neg repped I would go to a different thread that they have posted in and say "I agree with this" or if they helped someone I would say "Goodjob helping that person."

Are you saying that you would say "that person is obviously just trying to negate the neg rep!"

The moderators don't have the time nor the inclination to monitor ever single person who is neg repped, no matter what the ratio of moderators to people neg repped is. And adding more moderators for something as inconsequential for watching who reps who is a incredible waste of time.

 

[Avator]

But if there's nothing to compliment, there's no reason to give reputation. Now please let your next post be useful again and don't tell me I'm trolling.

 

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

I believe those addicting spinning gems make most people stay here on a long term. It's a good reward, encouragement and punishment. Besides, we would hardly have anything to make a difference between people, for example, how will a new user know who to turn for help or who to respect?

Removing it would only create more drama.

The drama would last two weeks at worst.

Every other forum lives without rep just fine. But, I agree having a little extra like that is fun, but not rep. The Escapist has a neat "awards" system. You get little awards under your user name (nothing shiny, just small icons, 4 displayed at a time) for reaching a certain number of posts without having a mod interefere, or starting a thread with over 1000 views for example. This could even work with ressources.

... miles better than this shitty system, though.

 

[Arvedui]

But if there's nothing to compliment, there's no reason to give reputation.

So you're going to dictate to people how and when they should give rep? That is one of the most ridiculous notions ever.

And all of that based on an "if"? It's a tremendous waste of time.

Now please let your next post be useful again and don't tell me I'm trolling.

I lol'd at this.

 

[Avator]

@WILL: You're actually saying you don't have a problem with the system (because it works just like that award system, only members can give little awards), but you have a problem with having it displayed as gems? xD

So you're going to dictate to people how and when they should give rep?

Think about that line for 1 hour and even you could figure out why that doesn't make you look like the brightest kid around to say.

 

[Arvedui]

Think about that line for 1 hour and even you could figure out why that doesn't make you look like the brightest kid around to say.

Maybe you should actually look at what you've written. It's entirely what your argument is.

But if there's nothing to compliment, there's no reason to give reputation.

The least that should happen is if anybody notices abuse of reputation, they should be punished.

If there is no good reason for giving out reputation, that should be punished as well.

Or when a negrepped person gets reputation for a post that doesn't contain anything useful. It's much harder to hide negating reputation then to find it, so negating negrep should still be punished.

Why not?

You cant really make any rules to control the reasons why people give reputation. They just give it because they feel like giving some rep.

[...]

Let users decide how important role rep plays in their life.

To which you replied:

As a matter of fact: We should decide that.

So, again, maybe you should pull your head out of your ass when you say things.

Speaking of which, you are a troll, and this thread proves it:

No spam posts...
We're here to have a serious discussion, not to open up a new place to place your junk posts in.

I think you've said enough useless comments in this thread already. You know darn well what I mean, but you're just too stubborn, so you spam more useless information here...
If I understand the conclusion of your post here, it means that you are 1 of the people here ruining the Hive on purpose.

You're only giving more useless comments. If you'd actually read what you're quoting, you'd read that there's a difference between every post and helpful posts.

[...]

You've given another useless post here. Please, for everybody's sake here: Think before you make another post. Experience as in Wc3 modding!

I get your point, but the only reason it doesn't work is because people like Viikuna are just too brainless for sense. Those are the people that screw up and I don't like to be the one suffering the consequences.

Read what he says, will you? You've been given a well-functioning brain when you were born, so keep that mass active.

Now please let your next post be useful again and don't tell me I'm trolling.

even you could figure out why that doesn't make you look like the brightest kid around to say.

---

Getting that out of the way, there's still a flaw in your argument, though it's not surprising.

Say this gets enforced and allll those bad people who give rep to negate someone else's neg rep are actually being punished.

Well, what if someone who doesn't know that the other person has neg rep and reps them anyway, and by mistake they get punished for it?

How do you then solve that? Well, one way would be to talk to the moderator, or make a thread in admin contact, whichever would be your preference. But the only problem with that is that people who do it on purpose could do that too. It's entirely possible for someone to lie about it if they disguised it well enough.

 

[Mr. Bob]

Getting that out of the way, there's still a flaw in your argument, though it's not surprising.

Say this gets enforced and allll those bad people who give rep to negate someone else's neg rep are actually being punished.

Well, what if someone who doesn't know that the other person has neg rep and reps them anyway, and by mistake they get punished for it?

How do you then solve that? Well, one way would be to talk to the moderator, or make a thread in admin contact, whichever would be your preference. But the only problem with that is that people who do it on purpose could do that too. It's entirely possible for someone to lie about it if they disguised it well enough.

Um, I don't know what the other guy thinks, but your missing the point.

You can give rep to people with neg rep. Just don't do it purely because they have neg rep.

As for punishment, it is rather hard to see. But, as I said COUNTLESS FREAKING TIMES with a moderator to neg repped people ratio of a bout 20 to 15, all it takes is a few of the mods to check there own specific person once a day. If they have any new rep, find out why. All it takes is about 45 seconds of their time.

Yes, they could lie. But, that doesn't mean we shouldn't enforce it. Obviously, fear of punishment comes into play here. Sure, we won't get ALL of them, but at least we made a lasting effect. Banning is obviously going to extremes, but we could start out with....Ah screw it. I already wrote all of this at least 3 times. Just go back to my first post here. It pretty much fixes everything. I don't understand why this thread is still up.

Lastly, quit telling the other guy he is trolling. Pointing it out in his own thread, in public, is childish and stupid. If you feel that he is really crossing the line, then go to the admins. Don't trash up his name here. Telling someone else he is a troll in public to make him look bad is trolling.

Avator: Stop it. This is a debate. Not a drama house. You show absolutely no respect for the posters here. They have opinions as well. Play nice or don't play at all.

 

[Arvedui]

Um, I don't know what the other guy thinks, but your missing the point.

You can give rep to people with neg rep. Just don't do it purely because they have neg rep.

As for punishment, it is rather hard to see. But, as I said COUNTLESS FREAKING TIMES with a moderator to neg repped people ratio of a bout 20 to 15, all it takes is a few of the mods to check there own specific person once a day. If they have any new rep, find out why. All it takes is about 45 seconds of their time.

Read the thread. You can easily disguise it.

Yes, they could lie. But, that doesn't mean we shouldn't enforce it. Obviously, fear of punishment comes into play here. Sure, we won't get ALL of them, but at least we made a lasting effect. Banning is obviously going to extremes, but we could start out with....Ah screw it. I already wrote all of this at least 3 times.

There's no reason to enforce something that's so abstract. Maybe you didn't get my point.

Just go back to my first post here. It pretty much fixes everything. I don't understand why this thread is still up.

Everyone thinks their solution is the best. Though I agree the thread shouldn't be up anymore because it's a moot point.

Lastly, quit telling the other guy he is trolling. Pointing it out in his own thread, in public, is childish and stupid. If you feel that he is really crossing the line, then go to the admins. Don't trash up his name here. Telling someone else he is a troll in public to make him look bad is trolling.

I have reported him. And will be doing so again.

Also, I didn't have to try to make him look bad. I used his own quotes.

 

[Avator]

I know what I said and Mr.Bob also knows what he said. So if we say something, you may assume we say it for a good reason.

If you don't have anything better to do then quoting us to get your post count up, please use a thread in the Off-topic for that. If not, please get back to the real subject at hand here.

 

[Arvedui]

I know what I said and Mr.Bob also knows what he said. So if we say something, you may assume we say it for a good reason.

By that I can only assume that you've flamed everyone who disagrees with you in this thread... for a reason.

If you don't have anything better to do then quoting us to get your post count up, please use a thread in the Off-topic for that. If not, please get back to the real subject at hand here.

lol. You do know this is the Site Discussion forum... right? I was trying to discuss why your point is wrong, but then you trolled and flamed me.

Look at how many posts you have in this thread compared to how many I have. Now who's trying to get their post count up.

Oh also, I don't think you're a moderator, so it's not up to you to tell people how and when they can post in this thread.

Anyway, you have yet to answer my question from before:

Getting that out of the way, there's still a flaw in your argument, though it's not surprising.

Say this gets enforced and allll those bad people who give rep to negate someone else's neg rep are actually being punished.

Well, what if someone who doesn't know that the other person has neg rep and reps them anyway, and by mistake they get punished for it?

How do you then solve that? Well, one way would be to talk to the moderator, or make a thread in admin contact, whichever would be your preference. But the only problem with that is that people who do it on purpose could do that too. It's entirely possible for someone to lie about it if they disguised it well enough.

 

[Mr. Bob]

Arvedui, I don't like wasting page space with quotes, so I will number it according to yours.

1.
We know. This is obvious. But, at least we made the effort.

2.
Same problem as above.

3.
I never said mine was the best. When I said, "I don't know why this thread is still up" I was saying that because this thread is subjective. Do not make random assumptions.

4. Good. But, don't report him here. That is my point.

You made him look bad by manipulating his own quotes.

NOW ON TO YOUR NEXT POST:

1.

Again, post it there, not here. This is a debate. Your point here is personal, deal with it in private.

2.
No offense, but that sounded very childish.

3.
I answered it. If you want specific people to answer your questions, send it to them personally. Do not stir up drama and childish bogus here. Not saying you are, but I see it rapidly approaching.

 

[Viikuna]

Mr Bob, you surely realize that if you only check people who have recently received -rep, they learn to adapt and wait and ask their friends to give +rep after so long time that you wont notice it.

That means you would have to make some rules to control the distribution of rep and some list of all possible legal repping situations, which would mean shitloads of work.

You should read what Hakeem said. You just cant get everyone to use rep the same way. Giving +rep to guys who have received -rep is not the problem, but a symptom caused by something bigger.

The current rep system just doesnt show how experienced someone is. Thats why rep system needs either a remake or then you just have to admit that rep does something, but that something is not what you want it to be.

Personaly I think rep should jsut be something "fun", so peopel can give it because of any reason without having to worry about any rules. Also it would be cool if users could give -rep too. And people should accept that rep does not show how experienced someone is. Its just rep, not real reputation.

 

[Mr. Bob]

Mr Bob, you surely realize that if you only check people who have recently received -rep, they learn to adapt and wait and ask their friends to give +rep after so long time that you wont notice it.

That means you would have to make some rules to control the distribution of rep and some list of all possible legal repping situations, which would mean shitloads of work.

You should read what Hakeem said. You just cant get everyone to use rep the same way. Giving +rep to guys who have received -rep is not the problem, but a symptom caused by something bigger.

The current rep system just doesnt show how experienced someone is. Thats why rep system needs either a remake or then you just have to admit that rep does something, but that something is not what you want it to be.

Personaly I think rep should jsut be something "fun", so peopel can give it because of any reason without having to worry about any rules. Also it would be cool if users could give -rep too. And people should accept that rep does not show how experienced someone is. Its just rep, not real reputation.

Paragraph 1. Yes very good point. But, this look back at my first post.

Paragraph 2. Yes very good point again. But, this look back at my first post.

Paragraph 3. Honestly, you've got it right on, but look back at my first post still.

Paragraph 4. You are indeed correct. I understand this. As explained in my first post.

Paragraph 5. Ah, now here is were we differ. I too, think it is just for fun. But it should not be useless. I'd rather we not care as well. But, there are those who do. Therefore we should adapt.

Dang man, you got it right on the mark!


I'll be back later today.

 

[Viikuna]

I checked your first postnd that is an interesting idea, that bocking regular rep + mod surveillance. It could maybe work, Im not a mod so i dont know how long it would take, you gotta ask some mod about that.

But still, it would only mean that there are repping rules for only those people who have negative rep and others can do whatever they like. It means that you are only trying to cure a symptom. The real problem is still there.

 

[Avator]

@Viikuna: The punishment system of negrep is also based on what a moderator thinks is fitting. That's why the guidelines were removed a while back. The same can be done here. I know that over a long, long time, people can get their negrep negated by doing it safe, but ofcoure they won't. Why? Because they know it would take a long, long time to do so.
Rep should absolutely not be used just for fun. An attitude like that caused the system to fail. Now if I may believe you, you want to spoil the fun you have by removing the reputation, which was meant to be fun for you. Now why would you do that?

@Arvedui: I'm not flaming nor trolling. I'm only trying to keep this thread to what it's meant for: Discussing punishment for negating negrep. So if you want to have a thread in the Site Discussion to post all your junk in, go make your own. But this is still a thread I made, so the subject is decided by me and me alone as long as it follows the Hive's rules. So as a matter of fact: It is partially up to me to decide what is posted here.

 

[Mr. Bob]

@Viikuna: The punishment system of negrep is also based on what a moderator thinks is fitting. That's why the guidelines were removed a while back. The same can be done here. I know that over a long, long time, people can get their negrep negated by doing it safe, but ofcoure they won't. Why? Because they know it would take a long, long time to do so.
Rep should absolutely not be used just for fun. An attitude like that caused the system to fail. Now if I may believe you, you want to spoil the fun you have by removing the reputation, which was meant to be fun for you. Now why would you do that?

It wouldn't neccisarily fail, it would just serve a different purpose. I wish we could make it purely for fun, but a lot of people take it to seriously, therefore, we must adapt and fix the problem that they have made up with their own likings.

 

[Viikuna]

I never really suported removing the rep system. If they remove it, its OK to me,I dont really care, and if they dont that works too.


Well, actually, I would like to see rep to stay because it can be kinda fun

Its just that people who take rep too seriosly and start to think about punishments ruin that fun. :´(

But yea, I dont use rep system so much, since I dont evaluate people according to their rep and I hardly ever even rep anybody ( expect some guys who mape pwnage awesome terrains and some guys who help me with Jass problems ( this has not happened in hive yet ) ).

But yea, I sometimes like to receive some rep.

edit. So the point of this messy post was that rep is sometimes pretty fun so it deserves an other chance.


edit2- What is great in rep IMO is that you can use it to tell some guy that "Hey, I think you did something really cool, and you should be proud of it" Thats why I like rep.